DVD Talk review of 'Rated X: A Journey Through Porn'
 

I read Don Houston's DVD review of Rated X: A Journey Through Porn at http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=18844 and...


I have to say that I feel the reviewer while doing his best to be fair, either glossed over the entire documentary itself, or went into it with a false expectation. What Dag delivers is the side of the porn industry, that the porn industry doesn't advertise. Consider it this way, ever thought of doing porn? Think it might be a great job to bang hot chicks, and get paid for it? Do you really want to spend the rest of your life as a waitress? Think it wouldn't be that bad to get paid well for giving up what every guy on earth wants you to give up anyway? WATCH THIS MOVIE! You are the audience. This is not some documentary that focuses on the 'big companies' and thier bottom line, and their business practice. The facts are Dag was in fact on the scenes of THE BIGGEST and the smallest companies shoots, but the point isn't the companies, it's the people. This is an anthropological document. You may or may not like it, and it may not have shed a lot of light on some issues as you may have liked or expected. But you know what? What you get is the truth.

"That it jumped around so much and never offered up a hypothesis to be challenged was a big problem... "

There was no hypothesis to this film, because it was not made TO JUDGE anyone. It was not made TO PROVE anything. It's a critique, and an honest glimpse into what it is to be IN the industry. I'm in the industry, I know. What I like about it is it leaves the door open to discussion, debate, and for the viewer to arrive at their own conclusion. He's not saying it's good or bad, he's showing us what IS, and then asking some thoughtful questions of his own, in fact he's asking some of the toughest questions, "why is it really necessary for the man to ejaculate on the woman?", or, "Would you mind if I interviewed your parents about what you do?" ...refering to an 18 year old porn actress whos parents he does indeed interview.


"Missing were Ron Jeremy as a focal point; a guy that makes himself available at any and every opportunity to be in small films"

Ron Jeremy, who is interviewed, is a lame focal point. His own life will make a good documentary in itself, which is why he would be a lame focal point for THIS movie. Dag chose stars who were willing to truly let him into their personal lives.

"He alluded to mob connections and then dropped the topic outright, touched on female created porn in the lightest of ways, and seemed to lack the background knowledge needed to really look at the porn industry in a detailed manner. "

If there actually are mob connections it's not nuclear science to imagine why the topic of mob connection were dropped. Theres a scene where dag was told if he filmed he would have his legs broken. I thought the female creation fo porn was one of the most eye opening things in the movie. He spent a lot of time with toni england, and she made a great subject. and she did not take it lightly. She a female director what more do want? Do you not accept her views?

As far as background knowledge...this too was the best part of the film, when Dag actually shoots a Jenna Fine film. The name of that film is Velvet I believe. Aside from performing in the film himself, I don't think you could ask for any more 'background knowledge'. He interviews his OWN MOM about that experience.

This is a damn good documentary, eye opening, a little scary, and I know one thing for sure after watching this, I will never look at the porn industry the same. As someone said in the movie, "The porn industry is sick and disgusting, it's filthy, and I hate it. But the guys are cute"


-nocritique

Dag,
it was interesting enough to rent but I thought that the limitations of the documentary were far outweighed by possibilities you could have displayed. Still, fans of porn, particularly older porn, might find it well worth their time. As a guy that's watched a whole lot of porn over the years and even hung around the edges of the industry (evidenced in part by my trip to last week's AEE show in Vegas-pictures coming soon), I just thought you could've done so much more with it.
Thanks for the input though even though I got the feeling you glanced over much of what I wrote in the review rather than reading it closely.

Don, you might be onto something in terms of the 'fans of older porn' comment goes. I'm way more into the 70s and 80s stuff than the more modern stuff (Suze and Ninn not withstanding) as I think you know, and I really enjoyed this documentary. I found it an insightful and interesting take on the genre, a little more removed from the average porno documentary (and let's face it, there's been a few lately). That being said, I can see where your comments came from. Your criticisms are perfectly valid and you've backed it up well enough to the point where I see where you're coming from, even if I think you were looking for something different from the movie than what you got. Either way, it's a perfectly fair and honest opinion of the movie.

Something is a little odd here. The OP refers to "Dag" (the director) as being somebody else but it's really him? If that is the case, that is rather lame...

I'm not sure what this quote is in reference to, but as to the first comment, and just to be clear, I am NOT DAG the director of this movie. I had nothing to do with this movie. I did however catch it at sxsw was blown away by it's rawness, and spoke with the director, who spoke about the film. I didn't gloss over much of the review which had lots of positive things to say don't get me wrong, (again I think you did your best to be fair and honest), but simply wanted to address some of the points of the review which I disagree with. Hope I didn't confuse anyone, or hurt the interviewers feelings, that was not the intent.

-nocritique